combatarmsfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Proposition - Rules, Revisions, and Reorganisations
VOTING IS NOW OVER, WITH A MAJORITY 'YES' VOTES IN ALL CATEGORIES. Rules For maintaining a functioning and efficient online community, rules a must. They clear out the bad apples, and let the thickest, juiciest ones shine. They also create a healthy environment in which every legitimate editor has an equal opportunity to shine. But most of all, they give the moderators a proper set of points to enforce, and it gives the users a straight forward list of things to avoid. Rules function best what they meet two standards; ease of access, and to be understandable. If the rules are not easy to find, access, and read by the users, it leads to confusion among the populace as to what exactly is and is not allowed. This often leads to jumping the gun in certain issues, and people getting reported for little to no reason. If the rules are not easy to understand, then they are not easy to follow. As such, a set of rules on any site needs to be easily in the public, with little or no effort involved in locating it. furthermore, the rules need to be presented in a manner which is clear and concise for all users, not just the literary professors. Finally, as a general point, rules need to be agreeable. When a set of rules meets these categories, they serve to strengthen the community. Revise the CAWiki Rule-Set The simplified rule set The above link leads to the closest thing that the CAWiki currently has to an official rule-set. What most will notice is that it is firstly very disorganized, and secondly somewhat vague in nature. This directly contradicts the nature of a rule set, which is mean to be clear and to the point. My first proposal is a revision to the wording of the rules to ensure that they function more efficiently for the wiki as a whole. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # They do more sound like: "How to be a good editor" and are currently not that related to basic rules. Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) # Muddapaka (talk) 06:04, February 10, 2013 (UTC) No Votes # Revisions Below I've listed a suggestion for a rule set, based off of the 'reasons' list on the 'block user' page available to those with the block power. I would like for people to vote on the individual rules. If it is a no vote, a general reason would be much appreciated. ''' Harassment and Profanity No user on the wiki shall be permitted to make malicious statements against another user for the purpose of harassment. In addition, profane words, phrases, and slang are not to be used on the wiki what so ever. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # However, I propose the exception to use them if they are needed in an article (should we ever have such an article :P). Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, '''Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) # Muddapaka (talk) 06:05, February 10, 2013 (UTC) lol no duh. No Votes # Malicious Editing The wiki is a place for players to come together and share their knowledge of Combat Arms with each other for the betterment of each other's game-play. As such, edits made with a malicious intent are not permitted. This includes, but is not limited to, removal of content, inserting opinions, and generally vandalizing pages. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # We might cut the opinions out there and mention them at a different place that they belong to the talk section, if this doesn't crowd the "new" rules too much. Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) No Votes # Spam and Advertising As stated above, the wiki is for the betterment of player's game-play. Activities such as spamming the chat, and advertising sites and other games are a determent to this goal. It disrupts conversation between players, and takes focus away from the topic. Furthermore, this being the Combat Arms wiki, advertisements for other games do not belong. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) No Votes # Ban Dodging The rules of the wiki are to be taken seriously. No one is above the rules; not the users, not the moderators, not even ZeroExalted. As such, if someone is caught in violation of the rules, it is the duty of the staff to ban that person. That ban is not to be dodged by the creation of another account. If you break a rule, you bear the punishment. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) No Votes # Abuse of Power As stated before, all Wikians are equal under the eyes of the rules. As such, when a staff member uses their powers and abilities with malicious intent they are to be punished for such behavior. Having staff powers is a serious responsibility, and should be treat as such. It should not be used for one's own personal gains, but to uphold the rules of the wiki. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) Agreed. All of the staff should be friendly and not use their power to abuse other editors. No Votes # Hack Supporting The CAWiki is not only a deep supporter of Combat Arms, but a deep supporter of legitimate game play. Furthermore, we are affiliated with Nexon through features such as the search bar on the Combat Arms main site. As such, encouragement, and by extension support for, hacking will not be tolerated. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) No Votes # THE VOTING ENDS AT 11:59 PM EST, ON 15TH OF FEBRUARY, 2013. Reorganizations In addition to being clear and concise, a rule-set must be readily accessible with little or no effort in finding it. The current 'simplified rule-set' currently does not fit that requirement. To find it one must go to the help link on the front page, and then fish for the specific page. For rules to be effective, they need to be conveniently located. What I suggest is to add the revised rules, should they be approved, into the 'welcome to the wiki' box on the front page. They would not have the overlong explanations currently present, but rather would be limited to their main title. Furthermore a link which leads directly to the elaborated rule-set will be available in such. Yes Votes # TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # I think we should put a link to it in the standard Welcome to the wiki-message as well. Soulblydd (talk) 08:59, February 8, 2013 (UTC) # ComradeJ, Queen of Explosives. # ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) No Votes # Final Comments The rules are in a dire state of disarray. They have led to, and will continue to lead to, many confusions, problems, and conflicts with the community. We may have missed the chance to nip this problem in the bud, but we can still do something about it. By supporting these new revisions we are ensuring that everyone on the wiki will know what is, and is not supported. This is a serious matter, and as such will be allotted a larger amount of time in order to work out a rewording which we can all be comfortable with. However, let it be known, this forum is not introducing any new rules. What we are voting on is simply a re-wording and combining of the current rules into a much clearer form, and moving it into a much more accessible location. Thank you for your time. TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:19, February 8, 2013 (UTC) Discussion In this section, please discuss and elaborate your position on these proposed revisions, and your reasoning behind them. Due to the multiple sections and subsections of this proposal, please leave your comment in the appropriate section. The section titled 'rules' is to discuss whether or not we need to revise the rules. The section titled 'revisions' is to discuss the individual proposed revisions. The section titled 'reorganizations' is to discuss whether or not to place the condensed proposed rule set in the, "Welcome to the Wiki" infobox on the front page. Rules *To address all of your obvious concerns with chat policy, I've been running, for the past few months, a test over at the Borderlands Wikia where I am also a Chat Mod. I've instated a Live! Chat policy thanks to my benevolent leader Dr. F, and it's been highly successful. I want to have this applied as the standard on this Wikia as well, as it takes into account the audience this game SHOULD pander to, while being fair. : http://borderlands.wikia.com/wiki/Borderlands_Wiki:Live!_Chat_policy : That's a link to the official policy on it. I understand that Borderlands is a Mature rated game, but Combat Arms is rated T, and the points that the policy covers would be suitable here as well. The game SHOULD be for teenagers, for which ESRB have determined that crude language is fine for. Even though there are people who are under the recommended age, as it isn't the issue of the Wikia. However, it is also understandable to keep profanity off the site. You have a choice to join in the chat portion of the Wikia, but the site is not, so that should be kept clean and professional. If you have any concerns with my proposal, feel free to ask. : 13:51, February 8, 2013 (UTC) :: Actually this really isn't about the chat, it's about better communication in respect to the rules. I want them to be more accessable and understandable, that way they're easier to follow. I do plan, however, on asking the community whether or not the main site rules should also be enforced in the chat, but that's after this vote. I'll include your suggestion as an alternative when I bring it up. :: When we're on the issue of rules, it's one of the things which really does need a vote. After all, the rules affect everyone, and we need to be sure that people are comfertable with them, even if it's just a rewording of the rules, such as proposed here. TopsyKretts3 (talk) 17:41, February 8, 2013 (UTC) :::Site rules don't apply to chat though. Nor could they. Site rules are tailored for the site, and chat rules are tailored for the chat. I enforce non-sensorship on the chat. As long as it is in no way biggoted, then it's essentially allowed. The policy is basically a textual reinforcement of this. Go ahead and read it. That will be what I enforce from here on out in the chat anyway. Most importantly though, cursing will be allowed. 18:33, February 8, 2013 (UTC) *I believe a standard list is required for duration of blocks, seriously. 08:19, February 9, 2013 (UTC) : I don't mean to disregard your idea, because it truly is something that needs to be considered. However, this particular discussion is based on the revision and reorganisation of the current rules. Not for adding new rules, not for deleting rules, but just for making them easier to understand. If you make your own discussion, similar to this one, on standardising the duration of blocks then I'd be more than happy to offer my opinions on that. TopsyKretts3 (talk) 08:23, February 9, 2013 (UTC) Revisions Reorganizations *Make it easily accessible so anyone could read it. ILYx3 (talk) 05:30, February 10, 2013 (UTC) : Absolutely, if the resolution passes then, as the passage states, they rules will be in the, "Welcome to the Wiki" section right on the front page. Furthermore there will be a link there as well which leads to a page which contains the full rules and explanation. TopsyKretts3 (talk) 06:22, February 10, 2013 (UTC) Category:Forum Threads